your average douchebag "returns" from near-death experience convinced he's seen the substance of reality when in fact he's only seen a summary of his own, then proceeds to bore you with dumb fears and hackneyed descriptions of the infinite ($15 for the hardcover).

your average douchebag "returns" from near-death experience convinced he's seen the substance of reality when in fact he's only seen a summary of his own, then proceeds to bore you with dumb fears and hackneyed descriptions of the infinite ($15 for the hardcover).

Haha. Yeah these seem to be people who don't realise the brain stands between them and reality. They are like stroke victims who see angels rising from the floor, and have zero understanding of the obvious fact that physiology is connected with experiences and that having an experience doesn't necessarily say anthing about reality outside of the skull. Instead, a unique experience suddenly necessarily implies the reality of "lordship of jesus christ". It's also the same as someone tripping on LSD thinking they are experiencing something 'more real'.

Haha. Yeah these seem to be people who don't realise the brain stands between them and reality. They are like stroke victims who see angels rising from the floor, and have zero understanding of the obvious fact that physiology is connected with experiences.

Haha. This person makes unfounded assumptions, just like the people he's criticising. How ironic.

Haha. Yeah these seem to be people who don't realise the brain stands between them and reality. They are like stroke victims who see angels rising from the floor, and have zero understanding of the obvious fact that physiology is connected with experiences.

Haha. This person makes unfounded assumptions, just like the people he's criticising. How ironic.

Honestly, you have not even a shred of proof of your assertion, but you believe it more fundamentally than I do anything. Why is this?

As far as these videos are concerned, it always amazes me how similar dreams, trips, "abductions", and "near death experiences" are. I'd love to know the mechanism at work which allows these similar states to be achieved. Also, it is laughable when people confuse the metaphor they witness for the truth of things.

That's not your assertion - your assertion is that experience can be reduced to brain function, which is, for one, a ridiculous statement as far as any philosopher of mind is concerned, and also totally unfounded. Yes, physiological changes in the brain cause changes in the subsequent experiences, just as changing experience continuously alters the chemistry of the brain! Your argument is like "blue and yellow together make green, so green is reducible to blue and yellow". It isn't.

That's not your assertion - your assertion is that experience can be reduced to brain function, which is, for one, a ridiculous statement as far as any philosopher of mind is concerned, and also totally unfounded. Yes, physiological changes in the brain cause changes in the subsequent experiences, just as changing experience continuously alters the chemistry of the brain! Your argument is like "blue and yellow together make green, so green is reducible to blue and yellow". It isn't.

"the obvious fact that physiology is connected with experiences and that having an experience doesn't necessarily say anthing about reality outside of the skull."

Exactly - it's jumping the gun in order to fulfill an ideological position. Furthermore, when such experiences are treated as nothing more than the results of brain chemistry, all meaning is stripped of them. Whatever one might learn - which is a tremendous deal, as anyone who's ever competently tackled meditation, lucid dreaming, psychedelics, or similar avenues of exploring the states of consciousness can attest to - becomes nullified by the proposed "subjectivity" of the experience. This, of course, rarely prevents those who have experienced such things from internalising the lessons - however, people who have no experience of such things are often incredibly quick to judge the suggested results as questionable at best, if not simply "wrong" due to their assumed "origin" (internal, rather than external).